Caoimhin O’Muraile ☭ Did The Russian And Ukrainian Leaders Both Get It Wrong? What Is the Possible Agenda of Both? What About the Fate of Football?

The debate on the rights and wrongs of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine go endlessly on and on. There is perhaps only one area of common agreement on the situation and that is the plight of Ukrainian civilians, women and children primarily, caught up in this mess. 

What I am going to write below is a completely different take on the situation and one which, to many, may sound highly unlikely, and probably is certainly controversial, but a new take is worthy of examination. So far, we have heard and seen differing viewpoints, particularly on social media, of whether Russia had a valid point in invading, with those opposed to the Russians being the majority but not by a clear mile.

Russia’s concerns over the security on their borders with Ukraine and Georgia do have validity. Ukraine is an “applicant state” for membership of the Atlantic alliance and should they be accepted into NATO it would bring US and Atlantic alliance troops to Russia’s borders. To add to Putin’s concerns Russia herself, as the largest state of the former Soviet Union, toyed with the idea of membership themselves back in 1954. The idea was dismissed by the USA probably fearing the then USSR would try to undermine NATO from within should they be accepted and the US probably had a point. 

Fast forward to 1990 and the USSR was disintegrating. Russia again, and this time a little more forcefully, applied to Join NATO and again was rejected. And in 2000 they made another concrete application for membership and were again refused. With the Ukraine looking likely to become a member perhaps Putin’s anguish could be understood. However, whether invading the Ukraine was the wisest and militarily advantageous move to make is doubtful, it certainly was not the only way to address the difficulty. There were many other ways Russia could have ironed out its concerns regarding the security of its western border other than invasion. They could have taken their concerns to the United Nations which, after all, is what they are there for. Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and therefore does carry some weight. A resolution from the UN guaranteeing their security may have gone a long way to averting this invasion. Such a motion would also have to guarantee Ukraine’s independence, but not with a NATO dagger at Russia’s throat. Another way round the situation may have been a meeting between the leaders of the United States President Joe Biden, as de facto military head of NATO, the Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, themselves to sort the perceived problem out. Perhaps a guarantee Ukraine would not join NATO in return for an equally binding oath from Russia to guarantee Ukraine’s right to exist as an independent sovereign nation state without interference. Ukraine having the right to associate with whoever they wish, including the European Union, Russia, or preferably both. Could this have been a way to alleviate Putin’s fears and prevent the invasion? Why were such moves not suggested by either Russia and/or Ukraine, the UN or even the USA? After all did US President Jimmy Carter not initiate the Camp David accord back in 1978? Is there a hidden agenda here by both combatants?

Another concern of Putin’s is the presence of the political far-right in Ukraine. He claims, with again some justification, to be “denazifying” the Ukraine. Why would he come to such a conclusion? Perhaps the presence of the white supremacist self-styled Nazi AZOV battalion in the Ukrainian National Guard may give us a clue here. This group styles itself on the Das Reich battalion of the Waffen SS and has the full backing of the Ukrainian Parliament. They are an official wing of the country's National Guard, all official and sanctioned by the Government. Given Russia’s defeat of Nazi Germany, at tremendous cost, apprehension over the presence of these neo-Nazis may be well founded.

When Vladimir Putin took the fateful decision to invade his neighbour, citing security grounds as his major, though not only, concern the perception he held was it would be a cakewalk. An easy romp through the Ukrainian countryside with the capital, Kyiv, capitulating within a week at the absolute most. This has proved to be an assessment well wide of the mark as if we believe Western media reports, which are not always reliable - their reports are often very subjective - the Ukrainian capital is no nearer falling now (at the time of writing) than a week ago as civilians prepare for its defence, though Russian troops are moving closer. So, Putin definitely miscalculated the level of resistance the Ukrainian Army and civilians would put up. The Russian Army are at very best making hard work of it, at worst possibly losing in places.

Whatever the reason, things are not going to operational plans, in fact the word disaster comes to mind! Despite the overwhelming odds supposedly in the favour of the invaders, on the ground things are not going to plan, this advantage is questionable as the Ukrainian Army is larger in numbers than those of Britain, France, Germany and Poland. Is Putin holding back the elite of his forces? If so, why? What are the Russian President's long term aims? 

Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, informs us that if his country falls other Eastern European countries will be next. Has he any evidence to back this claim up? Or, is he trying to involve NATO in his war, something which would be a serious escalation of the conflict. He keeps demanding a no-fly zone, enforced by NATO Airforce’s, again something which would be a major escalation of the situation, possibly leading to a third world war. Anybody who thinks Russian jets would not shoot down NATO planes in retaliation, are living in cloud cuckoo land. Zelenskyy is doing his best to bring NATO into the fray even goading them, suggesting the alliance is afraid of Russia. Under Article 5 of the NATO constitution the alliance will defend all its member states, all thirty of them. As the Ukraine is not yet a member state this does not apply to them. Putin should also be mindful of over-firing missiles into Poland the nearer the border his forces progress. Poland is a NATO member and such an incident as overshoot could spark World War Three, which would, in all probability, be nuclear.

The Ukrainian Army numbers around 170,000 with a further 100,000 reservists. According to reports the Russian invaders number around 130,000 giving the Ukrainians, not the Russians, the numerical advantage. The Ukrainian Army are as well-equipped as any other armed force in Europe with supplies from the USA, UK, France, Italy, Israel and many other countries. They have a perfectly adequate Airforce which, to my knowledge, they have not yet used. “Why can they not impose their own no-fly zone” over their country? “Most of the shelling has come from Russian artillery not aircraft” according to one US Military Commander, on a once shown news bulletin, which was not reshown on Six-One! Now, I wonder why it was not reshown? This is a question many within the NATO command structure have been quietly asking themselves. The Russian Army had been holding “manoeuvres” for some time on Ukraine’s eastern border making threatening noises. They then started joint manoeuvres with the forces of Belarus on Ukraine’s northern border still maintaining no invasion was planned, but acting increasingly menacing. This was obviously a lie, and on Thursday 24th February Russian forces crossed the border into Ukraine. Having recognised the majority Russian speaking areas of Kharkov, Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states there was little to no resistance there. They occupied these Russian speaking regions in East Ukraine and began slowly moving westwards. The question is: with so much warning time, and with a well-equipped large army why were Ukrainian troops not positioned in the north on the Belarus border, remaining on Ukrainian territory, and in the east could they not have been positioned, in force, say 20 kilometres (about 12.5 miles) to the west of the Russian speaking regions? Why was this not done? They have a well-equipped army, once comrades with the Russians in the old Soviet Red Army, and an adequate Airforce. They could have mounted a land and air defence because the invasion came as no surprise. Why was this not done? They also have a Navy though sea battles are probably less likely in this conflict. Given the weak progress the Russian’s are making, if reports are to be believed, the Ukrainian Armed forces could have held them or even repelled the invaders on the border. There is, or was, a convoy of Russian hardware stretching about 60km so my question is this; why have these sitting ducks not being hit? Please, do not say to save civilian lives because again if reports are to be believed, it is not working!

Could it be none of these basic military actions were taken because, and this is really cynical, the Ukrainian leadership want NATO troops on their soil, with the Ukraine as members, to hammer the Russians? Could this be the case, a deadly game of cat and mouse? A long shot granted but has anybody thought of this? Why has Joe Boden been relatively quiet about the situation? Apart from condemning the Russian action he has so far said little else, why? Could it be the Europeans are doing all the talking for him? Or, could it be he quietly suspects an ulterior motive behind the lack of military initiatives take by the Ukrainian? It could also be that the EU will be forced to buy oil from the US at twice the price formerly paid! There is no real evidence to suggest this suggestion is in any way true but, the fact remains the Ukrainians had ample warning of a Russian invasion and, it appears, did little apart from screaming for NATO help even when it was not necessary. That to me sounds very strange indeed. Was the invasion a secret hope of the Ukrainian Presidents in order to bring in NATO forces and hopefully give the Russians a kicking, even if this meant sacrificing civilian lives who, in wars, are always the victims. 

Historically speaking, much the same could have been said of Czechoslovakia in 1938. When Hitler was demanding the Sudetenland, Western Czechoslovakia, Czech leader Edvard Benes had a large army, big enough at that time to make Hitler think twice initially. Why then did Benes, Czech President, instead of waiting for the Munich conference, not move immediately in defence of his country? Like Putin with the Ukraine, Hitler made no secret of his plans to take the Sudetenland by force if necessary. When the Czechs made aggressive noises, Hitler hesitated before eventually moving, with the connivance of Britain and France. The question in the Ukraine is why did Zelenskyy not mobilise his quite formidable army earlier? The Ukrainian President constantly tells us the Russians will not stop at the Ukraine, they will go after the Baltic states and even Poland! This is highly unlikely as these countries are NATO members and the mutual protection Article 5 would be triggered. I don’t think Putin has any eyes on Poland or the Baltic states but the Ukrainian leader tells us they have. Is this another attempt to bring NATO into the conflict?

All this may be absolute crap - most readers probably think it is, and I am not saying it as a statement of fact. It does though raise some questions, which I heard one US commander hint at on TV. The Ukrainian Army have undoubtedly put up, and are continuing to offer, stiff resistance but could this not have been more effective if these forces had been right up to the border in the north, and in the east to the west of the Russian comfort zone? If, as we are constantly told, the Russian troops who believed themselves going in to keep the peace, peacekeepers, are so disillusioned then if they had met stiff opposition once inside Ukrainian territory many may have thought again! This may not have been sufficient to halt the Russian advance but the invaders would have known at an early stage they had a fight on their hands. As they moved further in, which they have struggled to do anyway, the Ukrainian artillery could have opened up without the fear of over-firing into Belarus. In the east the Ukrainians, by positioning themselves further westwards, would have avoided losses fighting with so-called Russian separatist cowboys thus engaging the Russian Army proper on Ukrainian land. Why were none of these basic military strategies carried out? It does not ring true to me a very smelly rat is tainting the air!

The Russian invaders and their leader Vladimir Putin definitely got it wrong if he thought it was going to be a turkey-shoot. Ukraine has not gone belly up and the Russian’s have suffered heavy casualties we are told. Putin, I very much doubt, expected this. The Ukrainian defenders also got it wrong in their tactics, as much more damage could have been done to the Russians. Instead, Zelenskyy has been shouting from the rooftops for NATO to come in, for more weapons from the West, and even creating straw men, like the Russian’s are also after the Baltic States and Poland. These are all NATO countries which, if invaded, would undoubtedly bring an alliance response under Article 5. A NATO imposed no-fly zone could well trigger World War Three and Zelenskyy knows this. Russian fighters would not stand for NATO jets shooting them down without retaliation. However, there is nothing preventing the Ukrainian fighters doing this, imposing their own no-fly zone! 

In the meantime, the real victims of this mayhem, as in all wars and conflicts, are the Ukrainian civilians and Russian anti-war protestors in Moscow. Ceasefires to allow these people's evacuation must be upheld by both sides in the Ukraine. On the border instances of racism have been reported: black and coloured refugees are facing double dangers as the Ukrainian and Polish border guards are reportedly discriminating against them. Like the Russian invasion such actions of clear racism, if true, and I believe they are, must be condemned by Western governments, including our own here in Ireland. Comments and criticisms on border racism, with the exception of People Before Profit TDs, have been noticeable by their absence and this must stop in the Dail. It is time to show the same indignation towards racism on the border as is shown over the invasion itself.

I have no time for Vladimir Putin or his invasion of Ukraine. His concerns over border security are legitimate but another way of solving this issue was and still could be possible. The offices of the UN is perhaps one avenue, as mentioned above. Neither do I have much time for Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Ukraine. He has an ulterior motive I suspect, otherwise his armed forces would have been positioned ready to engage the invader. They were not, why not? They are the second largest armed force in the area, after Russia, and were not in even a state of readiness it would appear. Zelenskyy wants NATO forces involved directly in defending the Ukraine, even though they are not NATO members. If he gets his way it will trigger World War Three which will be nuclear. Be under no illusions, those who are crying for NATO involvement, what the consequences will be. The death of the planet including your children and grandchildren whose fate you have no right to decide by nonsensical demands such as the Atlantic alliance involvement. If or when these nuclear toys start flying probably between the US and Russia initially then Britain which to all intents and purposes on this occasion will include us in Ireland, take one last look in the mirror!

The Western governments are all crying crocodile tears for Ukrainian civilians who, as usual in wars, are the ones who are suffering the most. It is right we take in refugees, no limits, though a costing programme should have run parallel to them coming in. Such a programme, certainly in Ireland, was not, in any depth, in place which could eventually result in resentment. However, and such a possibility to one side, the arms manufacturers are making a fortune out of selling arms to Ukraine, a fucking mint, while at the same time pretending to care for civilians. A contradiction in terms but that does not bother these wealth accumulating parasites. The USA, keeping relatively quiet with a few words of condemnation from Biden, will also make a fortune selling oil to the EU at twice the price!

Another consequence of this mess is football. If I were a Chelsea fan, which I am not, I would be fucking fuming over being dragged into this conflict. Roman Abramovich, their former owner, has been forced to sell the club due to the fact he might have nodded to Putin across a conference hall decades ago. God knows back in the seventies and eighties we went toe to toe with Chelsea fans on the terraces – by we I mean Man Utd fans – so I have little time for Chelsea. However, on this occasion I can empathise with them under the circumstances. They were in the football doldrums for years then, suddenly, along come Abramovich and bails them out of the shit, proving once again money is the motivator which buys success which deems football secondary to hard cash. Now, it appears the British Government, while making a fortune for the arms dealers, are sending them back down to those bygone depths of football depravity. 

If Abramovich was going to be punished it should have been when he first purchased the club using former Soviet workers' money which he had legally stolen from the privatisation of industry. Of course, this would not have suited the West's narrative, whereas now it does! When Chelsea hosted Newcastle, last Sunday, whose Saudi owners have a despicable human-rights record not a murmur form the Western hypocrites. Their armed forces are inflicting just as much, if not more damage on Yemen as are the Russians in Ukraine, but not a word of condemnation against them, let alone sanctions. Not one Saudi yacht confiscated and Newcastle United remains under Saudi ownership. Little wonder the chant of “Roman Abramovich, Roman Abramovich” rang out from the Chelsea vocal areas at the game. Not everybody shares the opinion that Abramovich is a criminal (anymore than any other capitalist thief) It makes me sick to the gut, the hypocrisy is sickening. FIFA, UEFA and now the British Government are lining up to put the already semi-fucked up game of football to the slaughter on the Ukrainian alter. Penalising Chelsea (the bastards) will not help Ukrainian refugees one iota. Destroying native culture, like football, could result in resentment as people, and particularly football fans, are fickle. Providing food and shelter for refugees, no limits, is one thing and laudable. Destroying a national institution such as football, even Chelsea, may well prove counterproductive.

All wars come to an end and this one will be no exception. To stop it coming to an apocalyptic end a compromise between the Ukraine and Russia must be reached. Perhaps something along the lines of: Ukraine will not apply, or will ever be accepted, for NATO membership thus reassuring Russia’s security concerns. Ukraine will disband the neo-Nazi AZOV battalion of their National Guard. Russia will drop all demands Ukraine do not join the European Union, leaving the country free to pursue whichever trading relations with whoever it wishes. The EU is not a military bloc and poses no military threat to Moscow, therefore Ukrainian membership of the bloc poses no threat. Even if it did, the EU armies, minus the USA, could be handled by the Russians but the situation would be unlikely to arise. This could be one way out of this mess which is costing countless civilians their homes and in many cases their lives. Compromise is always in such situations, 1939-45 exempted, the best way and such an arrangement as this would save face for both Russia and Ukraine.

Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

Wrong Calculations From Both Russia And Ukraine?

Caoimhin O’Muraile ☭ Did The Russian And Ukrainian Leaders Both Get It Wrong? What Is the Possible Agenda of Both? What About the Fate of Football?

The debate on the rights and wrongs of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine go endlessly on and on. There is perhaps only one area of common agreement on the situation and that is the plight of Ukrainian civilians, women and children primarily, caught up in this mess. 

What I am going to write below is a completely different take on the situation and one which, to many, may sound highly unlikely, and probably is certainly controversial, but a new take is worthy of examination. So far, we have heard and seen differing viewpoints, particularly on social media, of whether Russia had a valid point in invading, with those opposed to the Russians being the majority but not by a clear mile.

Russia’s concerns over the security on their borders with Ukraine and Georgia do have validity. Ukraine is an “applicant state” for membership of the Atlantic alliance and should they be accepted into NATO it would bring US and Atlantic alliance troops to Russia’s borders. To add to Putin’s concerns Russia herself, as the largest state of the former Soviet Union, toyed with the idea of membership themselves back in 1954. The idea was dismissed by the USA probably fearing the then USSR would try to undermine NATO from within should they be accepted and the US probably had a point. 

Fast forward to 1990 and the USSR was disintegrating. Russia again, and this time a little more forcefully, applied to Join NATO and again was rejected. And in 2000 they made another concrete application for membership and were again refused. With the Ukraine looking likely to become a member perhaps Putin’s anguish could be understood. However, whether invading the Ukraine was the wisest and militarily advantageous move to make is doubtful, it certainly was not the only way to address the difficulty. There were many other ways Russia could have ironed out its concerns regarding the security of its western border other than invasion. They could have taken their concerns to the United Nations which, after all, is what they are there for. Russia is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and therefore does carry some weight. A resolution from the UN guaranteeing their security may have gone a long way to averting this invasion. Such a motion would also have to guarantee Ukraine’s independence, but not with a NATO dagger at Russia’s throat. Another way round the situation may have been a meeting between the leaders of the United States President Joe Biden, as de facto military head of NATO, the Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, themselves to sort the perceived problem out. Perhaps a guarantee Ukraine would not join NATO in return for an equally binding oath from Russia to guarantee Ukraine’s right to exist as an independent sovereign nation state without interference. Ukraine having the right to associate with whoever they wish, including the European Union, Russia, or preferably both. Could this have been a way to alleviate Putin’s fears and prevent the invasion? Why were such moves not suggested by either Russia and/or Ukraine, the UN or even the USA? After all did US President Jimmy Carter not initiate the Camp David accord back in 1978? Is there a hidden agenda here by both combatants?

Another concern of Putin’s is the presence of the political far-right in Ukraine. He claims, with again some justification, to be “denazifying” the Ukraine. Why would he come to such a conclusion? Perhaps the presence of the white supremacist self-styled Nazi AZOV battalion in the Ukrainian National Guard may give us a clue here. This group styles itself on the Das Reich battalion of the Waffen SS and has the full backing of the Ukrainian Parliament. They are an official wing of the country's National Guard, all official and sanctioned by the Government. Given Russia’s defeat of Nazi Germany, at tremendous cost, apprehension over the presence of these neo-Nazis may be well founded.

When Vladimir Putin took the fateful decision to invade his neighbour, citing security grounds as his major, though not only, concern the perception he held was it would be a cakewalk. An easy romp through the Ukrainian countryside with the capital, Kyiv, capitulating within a week at the absolute most. This has proved to be an assessment well wide of the mark as if we believe Western media reports, which are not always reliable - their reports are often very subjective - the Ukrainian capital is no nearer falling now (at the time of writing) than a week ago as civilians prepare for its defence, though Russian troops are moving closer. So, Putin definitely miscalculated the level of resistance the Ukrainian Army and civilians would put up. The Russian Army are at very best making hard work of it, at worst possibly losing in places.

Whatever the reason, things are not going to operational plans, in fact the word disaster comes to mind! Despite the overwhelming odds supposedly in the favour of the invaders, on the ground things are not going to plan, this advantage is questionable as the Ukrainian Army is larger in numbers than those of Britain, France, Germany and Poland. Is Putin holding back the elite of his forces? If so, why? What are the Russian President's long term aims? 

Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, informs us that if his country falls other Eastern European countries will be next. Has he any evidence to back this claim up? Or, is he trying to involve NATO in his war, something which would be a serious escalation of the conflict. He keeps demanding a no-fly zone, enforced by NATO Airforce’s, again something which would be a major escalation of the situation, possibly leading to a third world war. Anybody who thinks Russian jets would not shoot down NATO planes in retaliation, are living in cloud cuckoo land. Zelenskyy is doing his best to bring NATO into the fray even goading them, suggesting the alliance is afraid of Russia. Under Article 5 of the NATO constitution the alliance will defend all its member states, all thirty of them. As the Ukraine is not yet a member state this does not apply to them. Putin should also be mindful of over-firing missiles into Poland the nearer the border his forces progress. Poland is a NATO member and such an incident as overshoot could spark World War Three, which would, in all probability, be nuclear.

The Ukrainian Army numbers around 170,000 with a further 100,000 reservists. According to reports the Russian invaders number around 130,000 giving the Ukrainians, not the Russians, the numerical advantage. The Ukrainian Army are as well-equipped as any other armed force in Europe with supplies from the USA, UK, France, Italy, Israel and many other countries. They have a perfectly adequate Airforce which, to my knowledge, they have not yet used. “Why can they not impose their own no-fly zone” over their country? “Most of the shelling has come from Russian artillery not aircraft” according to one US Military Commander, on a once shown news bulletin, which was not reshown on Six-One! Now, I wonder why it was not reshown? This is a question many within the NATO command structure have been quietly asking themselves. The Russian Army had been holding “manoeuvres” for some time on Ukraine’s eastern border making threatening noises. They then started joint manoeuvres with the forces of Belarus on Ukraine’s northern border still maintaining no invasion was planned, but acting increasingly menacing. This was obviously a lie, and on Thursday 24th February Russian forces crossed the border into Ukraine. Having recognised the majority Russian speaking areas of Kharkov, Donetsk and Luhansk as independent states there was little to no resistance there. They occupied these Russian speaking regions in East Ukraine and began slowly moving westwards. The question is: with so much warning time, and with a well-equipped large army why were Ukrainian troops not positioned in the north on the Belarus border, remaining on Ukrainian territory, and in the east could they not have been positioned, in force, say 20 kilometres (about 12.5 miles) to the west of the Russian speaking regions? Why was this not done? They have a well-equipped army, once comrades with the Russians in the old Soviet Red Army, and an adequate Airforce. They could have mounted a land and air defence because the invasion came as no surprise. Why was this not done? They also have a Navy though sea battles are probably less likely in this conflict. Given the weak progress the Russian’s are making, if reports are to be believed, the Ukrainian Armed forces could have held them or even repelled the invaders on the border. There is, or was, a convoy of Russian hardware stretching about 60km so my question is this; why have these sitting ducks not being hit? Please, do not say to save civilian lives because again if reports are to be believed, it is not working!

Could it be none of these basic military actions were taken because, and this is really cynical, the Ukrainian leadership want NATO troops on their soil, with the Ukraine as members, to hammer the Russians? Could this be the case, a deadly game of cat and mouse? A long shot granted but has anybody thought of this? Why has Joe Boden been relatively quiet about the situation? Apart from condemning the Russian action he has so far said little else, why? Could it be the Europeans are doing all the talking for him? Or, could it be he quietly suspects an ulterior motive behind the lack of military initiatives take by the Ukrainian? It could also be that the EU will be forced to buy oil from the US at twice the price formerly paid! There is no real evidence to suggest this suggestion is in any way true but, the fact remains the Ukrainians had ample warning of a Russian invasion and, it appears, did little apart from screaming for NATO help even when it was not necessary. That to me sounds very strange indeed. Was the invasion a secret hope of the Ukrainian Presidents in order to bring in NATO forces and hopefully give the Russians a kicking, even if this meant sacrificing civilian lives who, in wars, are always the victims. 

Historically speaking, much the same could have been said of Czechoslovakia in 1938. When Hitler was demanding the Sudetenland, Western Czechoslovakia, Czech leader Edvard Benes had a large army, big enough at that time to make Hitler think twice initially. Why then did Benes, Czech President, instead of waiting for the Munich conference, not move immediately in defence of his country? Like Putin with the Ukraine, Hitler made no secret of his plans to take the Sudetenland by force if necessary. When the Czechs made aggressive noises, Hitler hesitated before eventually moving, with the connivance of Britain and France. The question in the Ukraine is why did Zelenskyy not mobilise his quite formidable army earlier? The Ukrainian President constantly tells us the Russians will not stop at the Ukraine, they will go after the Baltic states and even Poland! This is highly unlikely as these countries are NATO members and the mutual protection Article 5 would be triggered. I don’t think Putin has any eyes on Poland or the Baltic states but the Ukrainian leader tells us they have. Is this another attempt to bring NATO into the conflict?

All this may be absolute crap - most readers probably think it is, and I am not saying it as a statement of fact. It does though raise some questions, which I heard one US commander hint at on TV. The Ukrainian Army have undoubtedly put up, and are continuing to offer, stiff resistance but could this not have been more effective if these forces had been right up to the border in the north, and in the east to the west of the Russian comfort zone? If, as we are constantly told, the Russian troops who believed themselves going in to keep the peace, peacekeepers, are so disillusioned then if they had met stiff opposition once inside Ukrainian territory many may have thought again! This may not have been sufficient to halt the Russian advance but the invaders would have known at an early stage they had a fight on their hands. As they moved further in, which they have struggled to do anyway, the Ukrainian artillery could have opened up without the fear of over-firing into Belarus. In the east the Ukrainians, by positioning themselves further westwards, would have avoided losses fighting with so-called Russian separatist cowboys thus engaging the Russian Army proper on Ukrainian land. Why were none of these basic military strategies carried out? It does not ring true to me a very smelly rat is tainting the air!

The Russian invaders and their leader Vladimir Putin definitely got it wrong if he thought it was going to be a turkey-shoot. Ukraine has not gone belly up and the Russian’s have suffered heavy casualties we are told. Putin, I very much doubt, expected this. The Ukrainian defenders also got it wrong in their tactics, as much more damage could have been done to the Russians. Instead, Zelenskyy has been shouting from the rooftops for NATO to come in, for more weapons from the West, and even creating straw men, like the Russian’s are also after the Baltic States and Poland. These are all NATO countries which, if invaded, would undoubtedly bring an alliance response under Article 5. A NATO imposed no-fly zone could well trigger World War Three and Zelenskyy knows this. Russian fighters would not stand for NATO jets shooting them down without retaliation. However, there is nothing preventing the Ukrainian fighters doing this, imposing their own no-fly zone! 

In the meantime, the real victims of this mayhem, as in all wars and conflicts, are the Ukrainian civilians and Russian anti-war protestors in Moscow. Ceasefires to allow these people's evacuation must be upheld by both sides in the Ukraine. On the border instances of racism have been reported: black and coloured refugees are facing double dangers as the Ukrainian and Polish border guards are reportedly discriminating against them. Like the Russian invasion such actions of clear racism, if true, and I believe they are, must be condemned by Western governments, including our own here in Ireland. Comments and criticisms on border racism, with the exception of People Before Profit TDs, have been noticeable by their absence and this must stop in the Dail. It is time to show the same indignation towards racism on the border as is shown over the invasion itself.

I have no time for Vladimir Putin or his invasion of Ukraine. His concerns over border security are legitimate but another way of solving this issue was and still could be possible. The offices of the UN is perhaps one avenue, as mentioned above. Neither do I have much time for Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Ukraine. He has an ulterior motive I suspect, otherwise his armed forces would have been positioned ready to engage the invader. They were not, why not? They are the second largest armed force in the area, after Russia, and were not in even a state of readiness it would appear. Zelenskyy wants NATO forces involved directly in defending the Ukraine, even though they are not NATO members. If he gets his way it will trigger World War Three which will be nuclear. Be under no illusions, those who are crying for NATO involvement, what the consequences will be. The death of the planet including your children and grandchildren whose fate you have no right to decide by nonsensical demands such as the Atlantic alliance involvement. If or when these nuclear toys start flying probably between the US and Russia initially then Britain which to all intents and purposes on this occasion will include us in Ireland, take one last look in the mirror!

The Western governments are all crying crocodile tears for Ukrainian civilians who, as usual in wars, are the ones who are suffering the most. It is right we take in refugees, no limits, though a costing programme should have run parallel to them coming in. Such a programme, certainly in Ireland, was not, in any depth, in place which could eventually result in resentment. However, and such a possibility to one side, the arms manufacturers are making a fortune out of selling arms to Ukraine, a fucking mint, while at the same time pretending to care for civilians. A contradiction in terms but that does not bother these wealth accumulating parasites. The USA, keeping relatively quiet with a few words of condemnation from Biden, will also make a fortune selling oil to the EU at twice the price!

Another consequence of this mess is football. If I were a Chelsea fan, which I am not, I would be fucking fuming over being dragged into this conflict. Roman Abramovich, their former owner, has been forced to sell the club due to the fact he might have nodded to Putin across a conference hall decades ago. God knows back in the seventies and eighties we went toe to toe with Chelsea fans on the terraces – by we I mean Man Utd fans – so I have little time for Chelsea. However, on this occasion I can empathise with them under the circumstances. They were in the football doldrums for years then, suddenly, along come Abramovich and bails them out of the shit, proving once again money is the motivator which buys success which deems football secondary to hard cash. Now, it appears the British Government, while making a fortune for the arms dealers, are sending them back down to those bygone depths of football depravity. 

If Abramovich was going to be punished it should have been when he first purchased the club using former Soviet workers' money which he had legally stolen from the privatisation of industry. Of course, this would not have suited the West's narrative, whereas now it does! When Chelsea hosted Newcastle, last Sunday, whose Saudi owners have a despicable human-rights record not a murmur form the Western hypocrites. Their armed forces are inflicting just as much, if not more damage on Yemen as are the Russians in Ukraine, but not a word of condemnation against them, let alone sanctions. Not one Saudi yacht confiscated and Newcastle United remains under Saudi ownership. Little wonder the chant of “Roman Abramovich, Roman Abramovich” rang out from the Chelsea vocal areas at the game. Not everybody shares the opinion that Abramovich is a criminal (anymore than any other capitalist thief) It makes me sick to the gut, the hypocrisy is sickening. FIFA, UEFA and now the British Government are lining up to put the already semi-fucked up game of football to the slaughter on the Ukrainian alter. Penalising Chelsea (the bastards) will not help Ukrainian refugees one iota. Destroying native culture, like football, could result in resentment as people, and particularly football fans, are fickle. Providing food and shelter for refugees, no limits, is one thing and laudable. Destroying a national institution such as football, even Chelsea, may well prove counterproductive.

All wars come to an end and this one will be no exception. To stop it coming to an apocalyptic end a compromise between the Ukraine and Russia must be reached. Perhaps something along the lines of: Ukraine will not apply, or will ever be accepted, for NATO membership thus reassuring Russia’s security concerns. Ukraine will disband the neo-Nazi AZOV battalion of their National Guard. Russia will drop all demands Ukraine do not join the European Union, leaving the country free to pursue whichever trading relations with whoever it wishes. The EU is not a military bloc and poses no military threat to Moscow, therefore Ukrainian membership of the bloc poses no threat. Even if it did, the EU armies, minus the USA, could be handled by the Russians but the situation would be unlikely to arise. This could be one way out of this mess which is costing countless civilians their homes and in many cases their lives. Compromise is always in such situations, 1939-45 exempted, the best way and such an arrangement as this would save face for both Russia and Ukraine.

Caoimhin O’Muraile is Independent 
Socialist Republican and Marxist

21 comments:

  1. "All wars come to an end and this one will be no exception. To stop it coming to an apocalyptic end a compromise between the Ukraine and Russia must be reached."

    To build a 'golden bridge' for Putin to exit via the Ukrainians and the West will have to concede even more than you suggest Caoimhín. As well as the disbanding of the AZOV brigades and the removal from their constitution of their aspiration to join NATO they will most likely have to concede on their national boundaries; Crimea and the new 'Republics' will probably be lost to them too.

    As you rightly say wrong calculations have been made all round. The biggest miscalculation, to my mind at least, was made by the mismanagement of the over-all geopolitical situation in recent decades. A failure to realistically factor for the potential clash between long existing and conflicting ideologies is what has got us to where we're at. The unrealistic raising of Ukrainian hopes, devoid of reasonable exploration of consequences was and is irresponsible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the link.

      Though the current situation in Ukraine is both shocking and heart-breaking the focus ought be on efforts at de-escalation rather than on interventions which will needlessly prolong the crisis.

      I'm with Cockburn; demonising Putin further will only unnecessarily exacerbate an already critically tense situation.

      Delete
  2. Like it, or like it not Henry, and I do not particularly like it there are two spheres of influence on this planet. The USA and Russia and Ukriane falls under the latter just as Panama falls under the former. All these people crying crocodile tears applauded the fall of the USSR, when it was obvious trouble awaited.

    There should be no more arms to Ukraine, their army is already well equiped and has purposely, as I see it, not been used correctly. Military strategy, as I pointed out, has not been maximised and the invasion could have been stopped. It appears to me that all these pro Ukrainian sentiments are more about anti-Russian feelings, even bordering on anti-Russian racism. At least AZOV make no secret of their hatreds. People appear to want NATO involved, irrespective of the consequences, just to beat Russia. That is what the Nazis want, and they will grow, and always have wanted Russia conquered. AZOV have already threatened Zelenskyy who, might I point out is Jewish, if he interfered with their shelling of the Russian speaking provinces before the invasion. Maybe there are more pro-Nazis in the west than first thought!! Giving Ukrainian refugees, righly so, shelter and food plus health care is one thing, arming neo-Nazis, intentionally or otherwise, is something else.

    NATO, from a Russian point of view, who nobody appears to want to know, must not get any closer their borders. Personally, I would have rid of these power blocks, along with the war mongering capitalists who profit from conflict, and a peacable socialist world might have a chance.

    Yes, Henry, compromise as I suggested, or along those lines, will be the only way. Perhaps you want Ukraine to have it all their own way, and given the Russian Black Sea fleet is in Crimea that will not happen. Ideally it should, just as the US should be kicked out of Shannon, but alas we do not live in an ideal world.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  3. Caoimhin - lot of work went into this. As much as I feel the Russians did have security concerns I don't feel that was their primary reason for waging war. I think the main motive is imperial expansionism. Nor can I rule out with confidence that they might not invade Poland if they feel it is cost free exercise. Ukraine might just have disabused them of that notion.
    To cause such misery and disruption to people's lives because of a feeling of insecurity would not get you a hearing if you were an individual. It might get you sectioned.
    I think there is probably much in what Henry Joy says.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AM, unless Putin is further aggravated or unnecessarily humiliated the Chinese will keep him in check. I don't see him going further than this current campaign. In the highly unlikely event of a deliberate attack on a NATO State and it's WW 111. Game over for us all!

      Delete
    2. HJ - it seems China is crucial to how it plays out

      Delete
  4. I'm certain Anthony security was their prime concern, though admitedly not their only one. If NATO get into Ukraine it means nuclear missiles are a mere five minutes from hitting Moscow to which Russia would have no defence. The best retatiatory action in the time frame they could take would be by hitting Western Europe and Britain, geographically that means us too. Other reasons are present, by products of their defence worries. Also the Nazi threat is real. By arming the already well armed Ukrainian Army is also arming the Nazis. Like the SS, AZOV are small to start with and, again like their mentors the SS, will grow. President Zelenskyy is not a safe man, due to his faith.

    In my article advised what may be a compromise. No NATO membership, due to causing undue distress to its neighbour, but EU membership should not present a problem.

    Finally, to repeat Putin had other options to air his concerns other than invasion. The UN were formed to solve such disputes without invasion. Maybe Putin was worried NATO, USA, would not abide by a UN resolution guaranteeing both Russian and Ukrainian security, their track record is not good. One thing for sure is compromise by both is the only logical way out of this mess. NATO no, EU yes, hows that for starters?

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  5. Chelsea FC will be sold very soon as the UK Gov does not want the political nightmare of letting them implode in their laps.

    And the Ukrainians have fought an admirable grinding war. They worked out there was little point in fighting them at their borders because they would quickly become overwhelmed, and FIBUA (Fighting in Built Up Areas) would level the playing field which it has. The Russians were then forced to resort to bombarding civilian population centers along with the bad PR this causes.

    No need to attack the bulk of a convoy when you can hit it at the front and back and incapacitate the whole thing. Also very bad for morale for the conscripts who cannot move and are under sniper attack.

    When the inevitable peace accord is signed the Ukrainian resistance will be taught in military academy's the world over.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The Ukrainian Army were larger in numbers, if reports are to be believed than Russias invasion force. They had 170,000 regulars, compared to 130,000 invaders. They also had/have 100,000 reservists to call on. They were well equiped with US, British, French and Israeli weapons so to suggest they woukd be overwhelned is a fallacy, nonesense.

    I have doubts Russia will have eyes on Poland and Baltic states. Poland is not, like Ukraine, on Russias borders and Belarus is a buffer country. Plus, Poland is a NATO member and article five would be triggered. Sure we kbow all this.

    All this continued supplying arms will do is arm the Nazi wing, which people are underestimating, and make the arms dealers even richer. Apparently, AZOV have already threatened President Zelenskyy with a lynching if he didn't stop interfering with their actions against the Russian speaking eastern provinces. Treat these people lightly at your peril.

    There is, of course, the notion that in WW11 Britain and France, or the ruling classes of both, were hoping the Nazis would invade Soviet Russia instead of Poland and they would go in with Hitler. My own research would back up this theory. Could this be a clandestine reason for ensuring weapons get into Ukraine prerending, at the same time, to be concerned for civillians?

    As for Ukrainian resistance being taught in military acaddmy's the world over, you may have a point. Did Hugh Dalton not model the SOE in WW11 on Irish resistance (the IRA) in the war of independence. The Kilmichael Ambush and othres were used to train SOE operatives.

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
  7. If it was a stand up 'green' army fight in the fields then Russian air superiority at the border would have been the deciding factor. Ukraine moved their Air Force to hiding spots just before the invasion which was a smart move. The Ukrainians have been very intelligent in selecting when and where they will defend and attack, and along with S100 air defense systems and stingers/blowpipe/javelins in the more populated areas have nullified the Russians air assault to a large degree.
    The Ukrainian defense forces are clearly working off NATO first grade intelligence and I’d be astonished if Langley didn’t have spooks in Kiev helping them out with satellite feeds et al.
    Taking out senior officers raises a huge eyebrow in this regard. That Intel is first rate, and along with the knowledge that the Russians are in large part a disillusioned conscript army the smart PR of interviewing POW’s and treating them well to put pressure on the domestic audience has clearly sent Putin even more irate.
    This is a very dangerous time. Putin looks like he’s backed into a corner, the oligarch cronies are abandoning him and the people are turning against him. The Russian generals are realizing they can’t win a quick victory and are too scared to face him down.

    ReplyDelete
  8. That is precisely why they coukd have been stopped at the border. 170,000 Ukranian voluteers could have perhaps have held Russias in large "disillusioned conscript army"

    Caoimhin O'Muraile

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. The Ukrainians would have been slaughtered once Russia established air superiority in that scenario. They have played their hand well.

      Delete
  9. I don't know about that - I guess they would have been easy pickings from the air

    ReplyDelete
  10. I'm finding the articles on TPQ extremely insightful. When the blatant fact that Russia should not have invaded Ukraine, and in doing so waged an aggressive war, the more I read about it, the more obvious it appears that it would happen.

    Personally, I don't think the war will expand beyond Ukraine's borders, and Putin will, at some point, accept a "peace with honour" style compromise. What is tragic is that Cold War 2 will undoubtedly start, and with the prospect of an unhinged gameshow host becoming the leader of the free world in two short years, that is frightening.

    Out of Cold War 2 will emerge leaders who want peaceful relationships, eventually. Then it'll be quiet for a while and then etc.

    Maybe people need to be reminded every so often of the horrors of war, so as to avoid it at all costs. This quote really stuck in my mind:

    "We and you (Kruschev and Robert McNamara) ought not to pull on the ends of a rope which you have tied the knots of war. Because the more the two of us pull, the tighter the knot will be tied. And then it will be necessary to cut that knot, and what that would mean is not for me to explain to you. I have participated in two wars and know that war ends when it has rolled through cities and villages, everywhere sowing death and destruction. For such is the logic of war. If people do not display wisdom, they will clash like blind moles and then mutual annihilation will commence."

    Nikita Khrushchev

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It certainly won't expand into a NATO member's territory, but I can see no reason why Putin will not resort to Chemical or Biological weapon deployment if and where he deems it required. It's nearly a month in and they have yet to take a major city, been grinded to a halt by fierce resistance, have reportedly supply chain issues and a disillusioned army of conscript soldiers who were lied to about what they were doing.

      Putin knows he can't keep it secret from the domestic audience too much longer and an occupying force in the Ukraine would take by some estimates over 500k Russian personnel. I've little doubt his patience is wearing thin and he will want this resolved within a week. I fear a chemical attack on a city to force a surrender is coming.

      Delete
    2. Chemical and biological weapon?
      Possible... if Chinaman allow it

      Delete
    3. HJ,

      Putin had no problems using a biological weapon in the UK when he tried to take out Skirpal, and no issue when using radioactive polonium-210 to whack Litvinenko so I don't think he's held back by Beijing in any regard. Indeed he probably views the UK's non-action in response to these incidents as indications that the West will do nothing but bluster in the face of his actions.

      Delete
    4. Yes Steve, he's well capable of using them.
      If he does though, will it be with the foreknowledge of China? Will Putin have their approval and blessing?
      All of these considerations are going to impact upon how events play out.

      Delete
  11. with them admitting to almost 10,000 of their own troops dead (2/3 of what the lost in Afghanistan) it is hard to say what they might do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. War has a logic and momentum all of it's own and leaves it unlikely that anyone can forecast absolutely what lies ahead. What we can say though, is that it will end. How and when it ends will be decided by a confluence of both pressure and constraint.

      Delete